With gun cover off on that Rafale it seems the Armee de’l Air is flying lower level gun runs, which opens them up to MANPADS.

Not necessarily. Gun cover off may simply mean “there is a reasonnable chance the gun could be used on that flight, let’s not take the risk to waste a cover when it’s simple to avoid it”.
It doesn’t mean the gun was actually fired in anger. Indeed, no smokes traces.

Mildave, I know uranium in Niger. Not so sure about Mali on that point…

Thanks for help. would u mind sending a serviceable C-17 instead ?
Just joking. Thanks anyway 🙂

Hi,

People able to read french really should follow Mr Merchet’s piece of advice when he says, here, “Il faut lire la Vérité sur notre guerre en Libye de Jean-Christophe Notin. C’est l’ouvrage le plus complet et le plus détaillé sur l’engagement français contre Kadhafi.”

Very detailed & documented book. I had the chance to hear some of the high ranking officers from all 3 french arms speak about Libya a few months ago in a “private” conference: this book confirms all I heard then, and even go further in details sometimes.

The book is (very) far from being “only” about Rafale, of course, but some of the hot debates who took place here in 2011 and later could find an answer in there.
For example: No the Rafale didn’t participate in the ISR campaign before march 19th. But yes, it has been considered at some time (don’t hold your breath, there is no analysis on SPECTRA’s precise capabilities ; OTOH, you’ll learn quite a bit about libyan’s ORBAT before intervention).
Another? The reader will learn exactly why 7 SCALPs (and not 8) were fired to Al Jufra AB.

Back to reading;
Cheers,
AZ

Wow, good news 🙂

For the next people that want to ask for such a pass, please consider using the version below for your letter.
Indeed the version quoted above, while comprehensible by a French, contains grammatical / orthograph errors and uses the 2nd person of singular (which is very familiar in french, not to be used in such a letter;))

Bonjour Monsieur Huby,

Je m’apelle INSERT NAME et j’habite à INSERT CITY, au Royaume Uni. Je suis «Planespotter» et je vais visiter Paris dans quelques semaines. Je voudrais prendre des photos d’avions aux abords de l’aéroport de Paris – Charles de Gaulle.

J’ai appris que cette pratique était soumise à autorisation de vos services. Pourriez-vous me délivrer une telle autorisation ?
Mon adresse est :

INSERT YOUR ADDRESS

Une copie de ma pièce d’identité est jointe en annexe.

Meilleures salutations,

INSERT SIGNATURE, NAME, CONTACT DETAILS etc

Cheers
AZ

Sorry to interrupt guys, but where exactly do all that fit into “Rafale news” :confused:

The fact that ASTRAC was used isn’t a proof that SPECTRA could not have perform similar function.

Of course not. But ASTAC is to be integrated on Mirage 2000D (the fact that it’s the M2000 and not the Rafale may indicate that SPECTRA is up to (part of?) the job, indeed).

The fact that the F1 is still in service isn’t a proof that Mirage 2000 and Rafale are less capable.

As said above, to keep ASTAC after the F1 retirement is, in my eyes, a proof that this pod has capabilities not (entirely) matched by integrated systems on more modern aircrafts.

No more, no less 😉

However the fact that SPECTRA was able to penetrate inside denied airspace unopposed is a demonstration of its capability.

I concur. My point is the airspace was not so actively denied (based on the testimonies quoted above).

As far as I’m concerned, technology is science, not magic. And when technology work for the purpose it was created, then that’s called success.

I fully agree 🙂